Baldur's Gate vs Baldur's Gate 2

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

I always thought this was interesting because most consider BG2 to be better. I look at the whole game as a series (and it can be played that way), but I think that BG1 did many things better than BG2 did that are overlooked such as freedom and exploration. Also it was better balanced.

What are your thoughts?

[magicattack]

I played each game numerous times back in the day.

BG1 was ground breaking. Prior to that game, the best open world PC RPG we had would have been the Ultima series. The best DnD PC RPG we had was the gold box series.

I remember searching every map corner to corner so as not to miss anything.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 25, 2015 12:44:50 GMT -5 magicattack said:

I played each game numerous times back in the day.

BG1 was ground breaking. Prior to that game, the best open world PC RPG we had would have been the Ultima series. The best DnD PC RPG we had was the gold box series.

I remember searching every map corner to corner so as not to miss anything.

Do you prefer the first or the second?>


I'm playing them on the enhanced version (gotta work out some bugs on BGT atm) and I'm reliving the past. There's something neat about starting out new and just exploring. You start out with nothing and you appreciate the first +1 weapon. At the end of 2 and TOB you had +4,5, and 6 level weapons all over. There was also a better character balance in the first game before the wizards became stupid broken.

Both are good but I think the first game needs more attention.

[magicattack]

I agree wholeheartedly. The second is probably the better game. I really enjoyed David Warner. The entire plot.

But the first one deserves love too.

You are right about the weapons. In the first one that first +1 weapon means something. A better chance to hit and 1 extra damage. Near the end of the second game if the inventory starts to fill up (rare) then the +2 and +3 weapons get tossed.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 25, 2015 14:43:15 GMT -5 magicattack said:

I agree wholeheartedly. The second is probably the better game. I really enjoyed David Warner. The entire plot.

But the first one deserves love too.

You are right about the weapons. In the first one that first +1 weapon means something. A better chance to hit and 1 extra damage. Near the end of the second game if the inventory starts to fill up (rare) then the +2 and +3 weapons get tossed.

I'll tell you. Once you play the game with the updated engine (BGT, TuTu, or Enhanced) many of the advantages of the second game are no longer there since they are both in an updated engine and more modern. You definitely have to give it a try.

I liked the story of both, but starting out in a sheltered keep and finding out you were a god child meant something. The first game was also more challenging and you didn't have so much overpowered stuff.

The second game streamlined it and made it more linear, but it made it so that the fewer areas you went to had encounters and were full of more people. In BG you'd often explore areas and go through empty land, which some people don't prefer.

In BG2 you were often dungeon crawling or finding an escape (Irenicus, Spellhold, Underdark, Shanguain City, Elven Forest), you really had only Chapter 2 and Chapter 6 do to the exploring.

I think the first game captures that traditional RPG feel, also the second game had more "alien" type enemies which feel much different than traditional PnP.